Prior to this, I was getting 44.4 fps on Q3 timedemo1, 1280 resolution, 32 bit color and textures, all details set to max, FSAA off. After, I am getting 60.8fps. I'm shellshocked, to say the least. I ran the benchmarks many, many times. Keep in mind that AnandTech benched the Creative Labs GTS (overclocked) at 54.4fps in Q3, same settings.
Apparently the regular install is just putting in a generic Voodoo driver instead of
the V5 specific driver. I'll give this a shot over the weekend guys, right now there isnt
much reason to consider a V5-5500 aside from FSAA capabilities, this might change things.
Although I have my doubts. :)
7pm update: Ok it looks like this is indeed a real issue, but it only
impacts some installs. I'll find out if this had any impact on the Shack benchmarks over the weekend and will
update them if necessary.
GigaPixel entered into a development agreement with Microsoft on February 18, 2000 to develop a highly advanced graphics chip design for use in Microsoft's soon-to-be-released "X-box." <snip> In early March, Microsoft advised GigaPixel that it intended to cancel the development agreement with GigaPixel and use another provider's 3D chips and technology. On March 31, 2000, Microsoft and GigaPixel entered into a release agreement under which Microsoft paid to GigaPixel the up-front development fees of $14 million as provided by the development agreement. The release agreement severs the proprietary development relationship between the companies and provides that GigaPixel will use its best efforts to deliver by June 2001 a non-proprietary sample of a product similar to the originally specified design. The non-proprietary sample is intended to demonstrate the features and performance of GigaPixel's advanced graphics chip technology. <snip>
update Jack - Now before you make all sorts of rash judgements about what he's saying, go and actually read the entire post. While I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with Gary, I must say that this snip does not do his argument justice.So why would a Voodoo5 have a longer life span than a card with T&L? One reason is because it's feature-proof, as strange as that may seem. Hardware T&L cards like the GeForce have their feature set pretty much frozen. For example, the GeForce supports lerping between 2 matrices from what I understand, and no more. Developers basically cannot use this feature, and require 4 matrices at a minimum. When APIs support this, the GeForce will have to fall back to software T&L or not expose the feature. The Voodoo5 uses software T&L all along and thus can implement any feature that comes along. Basically hardware T&L will accelerate (and even that is questionable) today's features only. Once new features come along, these cards will either not support the feature or fall back to software t&l. Note: this is for gfx chips that are hardwired, ie. not microcoded, heavily microcoded chips can implement most new features in microcode. So I would argue that hardware T&L does not increase longevity and can actually shorten it.
| Mtexels/sec | Bus Width | Memory | Bandwidth | |
| GeForce2 | 1600 | 128bits | 32mb(or64) | 5.2GB/sec |
| V5-5500 | 667 | 128bits *2 | 32mb *2 | 5.2GB/sec |
| V5-6000 | 1333 | 128bits *4 | 32mb *4 | 10.4GB/sec |
Now, looking at the benchmarks/comparisons between the GeForce2 and V5-5500, (example chart)the GF2 has more than double the MTexels/second fill rate of the V5-5500. If the fill rate were the bottleneck/limiting factor then you would expect the GF2 to come out with framerates of approx double. Bummer though, that isnt the case. Memory bandwidth is becoming more of an issue. How fast will the V5-6000 be? Really tough to tell. 3dfx isnt exactly known for stellar OpenGL drivers. I saw it running at WinHEC a little while back and my professional opinion is 'fast'.
We have identified the problem. Yes, there IS a problem. [snip] we expect to be able to resolve this very quickly.
Most of the local stores have been told by 3dfx that the delay is going to be 2 weeks.
Advertisement